Unconditional court undertaking breached in compromise disposal constitutes contempt and justifies punishment for disobedience.

Breach of an unconditional personal undertaking given to the court in support of a compromise, and acted upon when the appeal was disposed of, constitutes contempt of court. The undertaking to vacate the premises by a fixed date was accepted as part of the compromise, and the later attempt to deny compliance did not alter the finding that it had not been honoured. Disobedience of an undertaking accepted in pending proceedings and relied on by the court amounts to misconduct punishable as contempt, and the contemner was held guilty and punished for breach of that undertaking.

---

---

Issues: Whether breach of a personal undertaking given to the Court in support of a compromise, on the faith of which the appeal was disposed of, amounts to contempt.

Analysis: A personal undertaking to vacate the premises by a fixed date was given to the Court and was made part of the compromise by which the appeal was disposed of. The Court found the undertaking to be unconditional and unqualified, and held that the later attempt to deny compliance did not displace the conclusion that the undertaking had not been honoured. A breach of an undertaking accepted by the Court in pending proceedings and acted upon by it is misconduct amounting to contempt.

Conclusion: The breach of the personal undertaking amounted to contempt of Court.

Final Conclusion: The contemner was held guilty and punished for disobedience of the undertaking on which the compromise disposal had been made.

Ratio Decidendi: Breach of an unconditional undertaking given to a court in pending proceedings, where the court acts upon that undertaking and disposes of the matter on that basis, constitutes contempt of court.

---